There are two interesting elements here. One is that we look after the price of electricity for our ratepayers. We think that if we can get a better price for the cost of covering the liability we're required to cover, this will look after them. It seems that probably we're not going to have to resort to the taxpayers. Remember that, certainly in the case of the consumers of electricity, our costs are passed on in the price. So if we can get a reduced price, we think this is a much better place for us to be. We think the 50% acts, in a sense, as an artificial limit to the variability of plans we might bring in front of the minister to comply with the new limit of $650 million. And we think that this probably is better not only for our ratepayers, our taxpayers, but probably for our shareholders as well.
On November 27th, 2007. See this statement in context.